mistaowen wrote:It is pretty funny how obviously bad we were at covering #3 and #4 receivers. A lot of said on here how that was what was destroying us and led to our losses. #21 seems about right in that area.

Well we aren't obviously bad.

Obviously bad is last year when we were ranked #32 in covering RB's. That is obviously bad.

They also claim we're the second most consistent team. I'm trying to just enjoy the ride right now, comparing to where we were in the Mora year, we have come a long way, who knows how long it will last but ride the lightening.

Weighted are the numbers that really matter, where we're #11 for special teams; but still, this is great. Obviously, we all know our offense has improved by leaps and bounds the past few games, but I didn't realize our overall ranking had climbed quite so much. This is awesome.

RolandDeschain wrote:Weighted are the numbers that really matter, where we're #11 for special teams; but still, this is great. Obviously, we all know our offense has improved by leaps and bounds the past few games, but I didn't realize our overall ranking had climbed quite so much. This is awesome.

With the teams we face and the teams the other top defenses face, we have a shot at being the #1 ranked defense.

And the best thing is we are middle of the pack in turnovers. The reason that is good is because unlike the Bears, if our defense doesn't force turnovers we aren't completely screwed. Turnovers are an added bonus for us, not something we need to have happen for us to win.

Those statistics state what I have suspected all season long. Our corners are so good they literally delete the #1 and #2 WRs from the stat sheet. They are so good, in fact, that QBs rarely test them, instead opting to throw over the middle of the field on short/intermediate distance passes, or hitting RBs in the flat on screens and swing routes. Nothing else is open for them.

What impresses me most is that we do this primarily with man coverage. Man cover corners are a dying breed in the modern NFL (though they may be coming back thanks to us), making good ones very rare and difficult to find in the draft. Thanks to our simply amazing scouting efforts, we have two elite man cover corners, which lets us play cover 1 and even cover 0 looks without it being too risky to attempt.

Compare this to the days when Trufant and Jennings were our starting corners. Trufant was never bad, but even during his Pro Bowl year, he was no Brandon Browner or Richard Sherman.

Feel free to contact me if you need legal assistance. I have a great lawyer that helped me with an ex who violated my privacy and kept harassing me on MySpace and Facebook. He's very good. And there is legal precedent. - linuxpro

SmokinHawk wrote:Those statistics state what I have suspected all season long. Our corners are so good they literally delete the #1 and #2 WRs from the stat sheet. They are so good, in fact, that QBs rarely test them, instead opting to throw over the middle of the field on short/intermediate distance passes, or hitting RBs in the flat on screens and swing routes. Nothing else is open for them.

What impresses me most is that we do this primarily with man coverage. Man cover corners are a dying breed in the modern NFL (though they may be coming back thanks to us), making good ones very rare and difficult to find in the draft. Thanks to our simply amazing scouting efforts, we have two elite man cover corners, which lets us play cover 1 and even cover 0 looks without it being too risky to attempt.

Compare this to the days when Trufant and Jennings were our starting corners. Trufant was never bad, but even during his Pro Bowl year, he was no Brandon Browner or Richard Sherman.

mistaowen wrote:It is pretty funny how obviously bad we were at covering #3 and #4 receivers. A lot of said on here how that was what was destroying us and led to our losses. #21 seems about right in that area.

I believe this is about to change with Thurmond III coming back from injury. Trufant played admirably, but has lost a few steps.

RolandDeschain wrote:Weighted are the numbers that really matter, where we're #11 for special teams; but still, this is great. Obviously, we all know our offense has improved by leaps and bounds the past few games, but I didn't realize our overall ranking had climbed quite so much. This is awesome.

ABANDON SHIP! WE FELL TO #11 ON SPECIAL TEAMS RANKINGS!

Fire Brian Schneider! (He's probably the brother of John, so it only makes sense to get rid of the nepotism, amirite?)

hawksfan515 wrote:ABANDON SHIP! WE FELL TO #11 ON SPECIAL TEAMS RANKINGS!

Lol, don't get on my case about it, I'm just saying that the weighted (i.e., more recent) ST rankings have us dropping the figurative ball on special teams, compared to earlier in the season.

Yeah, I'm alright with it as long as we don't see that in our offense (Weighted is a higher) and defense (when you are ranked that high it's hard to get too much higher when weighted, and we only drop .1% in weighted defense. Not much at all).

SmokinHawk wrote:Those statistics state what I have suspected all season long. Our corners are so good they literally delete the #1 and #2 WRs from the stat sheet. They are so good, in fact, that QBs rarely test them, instead opting to throw over the middle of the field on short/intermediate distance passes, or hitting RBs in the flat on screens and swing routes. Nothing else is open for them.

What impresses me most is that we do this primarily with man coverage. Man cover corners are a dying breed in the modern NFL (though they may be coming back thanks to us), making good ones very rare and difficult to find in the draft. Thanks to our simply amazing scouting efforts, we have two elite man cover corners, which lets us play cover 1 and even cover 0 looks without it being too risky to attempt.

Compare this to the days when Trufant and Jennings were our starting corners. Trufant was never bad, but even during his Pro Bowl year, he was no Brandon Browner or Richard Sherman.

I think "inexperience" is a better term for our linebackers. Another part of it, like Smokin pointed out, is QB's throwing over the middle so much because there's nowhere else for them to go. Very few QB's can string together repeated long drives with that.

kearly wrote:Seattle is now #4 in overall DVOA, behind just Denver, New England, and SF. SF is #1 at 41%, which is pretty amazing considering that most of that was with Alex Smith at QB.

The 49ers were ranked #6 last week. They got a huge bump for the way they manhandled a Bears team that was top-5 by DVOA, but I'm pretty sure the numbers don't account for Cutler being unavailable for that game.

kearly wrote:Seattle is now #4 in overall DVOA, behind just Denver, New England, and SF. SF is #1 at 41%, which is pretty amazing considering that most of that was with Alex Smith at QB.

The 49ers were ranked #6 last week. They got a huge bump for the way they manhandled a Bears team that was top-5 by DVOA, but I'm pretty sure the numbers don't account for Cutler being unavailable for that game.

They also don't account for Colin Kaepernick having a better game than Smith has had all season...against a top 5 DVOA bears D that didn't show up to play.

Doug Baldwin took a hit to the head when he was younger and now can't remember how to drop a football. - SomersetHawk